Cycling UK Forum

3 incidents recently of motorists ignoring advance stop line, one resulting in a bit of a tecthy remark from the drivers when I pulled up beside him and looked at his car and the stop lines (on my bike of course) ("Do this **** you off" - "yes, if its deliberate" "mumble mumble tax mumble mumble")

2 of these incidents had a police car behind the offender, in both cases the offender carried on creeping across the bike area against a red light. But no action from the officers in the police car.

How can we get people to take notice of these things under these circumstances?

You've got no chance. To car drivers they're simply part of "their" road.

I even watched a police car roll gently into and half way out of the other side of one in Glasgow a few weeks back. Was tempted to take a picture, but suspected that would end badly...

It is a lost cause, best not to let it wind you up any more.

They have a great big loophole about having to stop at the second line if they have already crossed the first when the light changes and it is "impossible" to prove they didnt do just that, even when you have watched them crawl into it on red.

Make sure to end up at the head of the ASL, this may involve being "across" the lane. Then wait until the lights turn green before allowing your bike to move forward at all, then turn it round - remount and settle one foot before checking for other traffic and proceeding calmly.

beardy wrote:It is a lost cause, best not to let it wind you up any more.

They have a great big loophole about having to stop at the second line if they have already crossed the first when the light changes and it is "impossible" to prove they didnt do just that, even when you have watched them crawl into it on red.

Of course it isn't - it is just a matter of the police not be bothered.

Yes, the offence is to cross the line while the lights are on red (ie exactly the same offence a driver commits if they run a red light with no ASL). Exactly as with crossing into a cycle box a prosecution has to prove that the lights were red at the point the vehicle crossed - it is not sufficient to witness a vehicle beyond the line after the lights have changed. But this most certainly does not mean that it is imposible to prove. Drivers are regularly prosecuted for red light jumping - and cameras often set up to gather evidence. If prosecutions can be brought for drivers crossing normal stop lines then they can be brought using exactly the same methods for drivers crossing a stop line to enter an ASL.

The suggested loophole is nothing of the sort. It just states that both stop lines carry exactly the same legal status - drivers can be prosecuted for crossing either stop line - stopping at the second line is not a defence for crossing the first.

[XAP]Bob wrote:Make sure to end up at the head of the ASL, this may involve being "across" the lane. Then wait until the lights turn green before allowing your bike to move forward at all, then turn it round - remount and settle one foot before checking for other traffic and proceeding calmly.

And better still - if the lights are on a short cycle - this manoever can sometimes take up the entire green phase of the cycle.

Pete Owens wrote:

[XAP]Bob wrote:Make sure to end up at the head of the ASL, this may involve being "across" the lane. Then wait until the lights turn green before allowing your bike to move forward at all, then turn it round - remount and settle one foot before checking for other traffic and proceeding calmly.

And better still - if the lights are on a short cycle - this manoever can sometimes take up the entire green phase of the cycle.

At whci point you may need to withdraw behind the ASL for your own safety.

Pete Owens wrote:

[XAP]Bob wrote:Make sure to end up at the head of the ASL, this may involve being "across" the lane. Then wait until the lights turn green before allowing your bike to move forward at all, then turn it round - remount and settle one foot before checking for other traffic and proceeding calmly.

And better still - if the lights are on a short cycle - this manoever can sometimes take up the entire green phase of the cycle.

Punishment obstruction - this seems to be motivated by the same thinking as car drivers who carry out so called punishment overtakes against cyclists. Neither action is conducive to good will between motorists and cyclists.

But there is a difference - cyclists DO have a greater entitlement than drivers to use an ASL. Drivers do not have a greater entitlement than cyclists to use the road in general.

Personally, I think the good will gas been broken by a driver creeping over the stop line.

Pete Owens wrote:Drivers are regularly prosecuted for red light jumping - and cameras often set up to gather evidence.

I thought cameras set up to detect red light and box junction offences were all, or nearly all, removed or disabled at the time that the govt brought in tougher regulations on the use of speed cameras and the like. The ones I was aware of were all removed at that time.

pete75 wrote:Punishment obstruction - this seems to be motivated by the same thinking as car drivers who carry out so called punishment overtakes against cyclists. Neither action is conducive to good will between motorists and cyclists.

No - just behaving in a safe fashion.

I will use the "for cyclists safety they are placed ahead of the traffic queue for this junction" area and make sure I can move off safely.

Obviously in doing so I will avoid jumping the red light.

Question: If you took a photo of a car sitting over an ASL area showing the vehicle, its number plate and the traffic lights on red, and you gave it to your local Police with a statement (agreeing to attend any court is necessary), would they do anything.

Interested because it would be less work for them to prosecute and, were it to go to court you would have to attend rather than the Police Officer (as no Police Officer would have been involved).

Ian

Psamathe wrote:Question: If you took a photo of a car sitting over an ASL area showing the vehicle, its number plate and the traffic lights on red, and you gave it to your local Police with a statement (agreeing to attend any court is necessary), would they do anything.

Interested because it would be less work for them to prosecute and, were it to go to court you would have to attend rather than the Police Officer (as no Police Officer would have been involved).

Ian

I'll suggest that this is a non-starter - at least as you have set it out, for at least two reasons.

The first is that the suggested pic would not, in itself, prove an offence. Without repeating all that's been said on numerous similar threads, it wouldn't show whether the driver had stopped at the second line, because he could not safely stop at the first (somebody above has explained this loophole.) Traffic light offences are notoriously difficult to prove because a witness has to convince the court that they could simultaneously see the signal and the position of the vehicle in relation to the stop line. It's the convincing that's the hard part.

The second is that following up this type of complaint is much more time-consuming/ expensive than having police officers at the scene, issuing fixed penalty notices.

The issue, IMO, is why aren't the police doing that? The answer is that it's not a priority. The way to make it a local priority is for enough people to lobby their local Police and Crime Commissioner. While this may seem a difficult task, these people are desperate for public interest because they get so little.

ASLs and their reserved space for bikes have always been a waste of time in my opinion.

In most cases the stop line for cyclists hasn't been advanced, it is the stop line for motorists that has been put back a few yards and cyclists use the old stop line.

We all know the ASL rules are ignored by most drivers, but it hardly matters.

Before ASL stop line markings were introduced I always used to go way beyond the stop line to wait for the lights to change and I still do, so I don't really mind motorists on the green painted area a few yards behind me.

blackbike wrote:ASLs and their reserved space for bikes have always been a waste of time in my opinion.

(Most of my cycling is country lanes without ASLs but) when I come across ASLs they make no different to me. I always keep my position in the traffic in primary position. So if I happen to be "at the front" I will be in the ASL zone. But if there is one or more cars in front of me I don't pass them (neither side) to get to the ASL area - mainly as I think that if the lights changed whilst I was moving to the ASL area I would be in a difficult/dangerous position (inside or outside vehicles where the drivers may not have seen you in their mirrors and more focused on getting across the lights as quickly and as fast as possible.

When I do happen to be at the front in the ASL area, it actually makes no difference as were there no ASL then I would still be at the front of the queue, in the middle of the lane, completely blocking all cars behind me in the same lane.

So, having never done any bike training, am I doing this wrong or badly ?

Ian